Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Redesignation of the Huntington, WV Portion of the Huntington-Ashland 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Maintenance Plan, 39618-39629 [E6-11042]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
39618
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101(4)(A), 104(a))
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–10969 Filed 7–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0485; FRL–8196–7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West
Virginia; Redesignation of the
Huntington, WV Portion of the
Huntington-Ashland 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and
Approval of the Maintenance Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a redesignation request and a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for
the Huntington portion of the
Huntington-Ashland, WV–KY (herein
referred to as the ‘‘Huntington-Ashland
area’’) interstate area from
nonattainment to attainment of the 8hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). The West
Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection (WVDEP) is requesting that
the Cabell and Wayne County, West
Virginia (Huntington) portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area be
redesignated as attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. The interstate
Huntington-Ashland 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area is comprised of
three counties (Cabell and Wayne
Counties, West Virginia and Boyd
County, Kentucky). EPA is proposing to
approve the ozone redesignation request
for the Huntington portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area. In
conjunction with its redesignation
request, the WVDEP submitted a SIP
revision consisting of a maintenance
plan for Huntington that provides for
continued attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for the next 12 years.
EPA is proposing to make a
determination that Huntington has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based
upon three years of complete, qualityassured ambient air quality ozone
monitoring data for 2003–2005. EPA’s
proposed approval of the 8-hour ozone
redesignation request is based on its
determination that Huntington has met
the criteria for redesignation to
attainment specified in the Clean Air
Act (CAA). EPA is providing
information on the status of its
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that
are identified in the Huntington
maintenance plan for purposes of
transportation conformity, and is also
proposing to approve those MVEBs.
EPA is proposing approval of the
redesignation request and of the
maintenance plan revision to the West
Virginia SIP in accordance with the
requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2006–0485 by one of the
following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPAR03–OAR–2006–0485,
Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, D. Mailcode 3AP21,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
E. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2006–
0485. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at https://
www.epa.gov/edocket
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the West Virginia
Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601
57th Street SE, Charleston, WV 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Caprio, (215) 814–2156, or by email at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation
to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These
Actions?
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s
Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets Established and Identified in the
Huntington Maintenance Plan Adequate
and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
1. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To
Take?
On May 17, 2006, WVDEP formally
submitted a request to redesignate
Huntington from nonattainment to
attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone. On May 17, 2006, West Virginia
submitted a maintenance plan for
Huntington as a SIP revision, to ensure
continued attainment over the next 12
years. Huntington is comprised of
Cabell and Wayne Counties. Huntington
is currently designated as a basic 8-hour
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
ozone nonattainment area. EPA is
proposing to determine that Huntington
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
and that it has met the requirements for
redesignation pursuant to section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is,
therefore, proposing to approve the
redesignation request to change the
designation of Huntington from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve the maintenance
plan SIP revision for Huntington, such
approval being one of the CAA
requirements for approval of a
redesignation request. The maintenance
plan is designed to ensure continued
attainment throughout the HuntingtonAshland area for the next 12 years.
Additionally, EPA is announcing its
action on the adequacy process for the
MVEBs identified in the Huntington
maintenance plan, and proposing to
approve the MVEBs identified for
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) for transportation
conformity purposes. These MVEBs are
State MVEBs for the West Virginia
portion of the Huntington-Ashland 8hour ozone area. In a separate submittal,
the Commonwealth of Kentucky is
establishing MVEBs for the remainder of
this area (i.e., Boyd County).
Concurrently, the State is requesting
that EPA approve the maintenance plan
as meeting the requirements of CAA
175A(b) with respect to the 1-hour
ozone maintenance plan update.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted
directly by sources. Rather, emissions of
NOX and VOC react in the presence of
sunlight to form ground-level ozone.
The air pollutants NOX and VOC are
referred to as precursors of ozone. The
CAA establishes a process for air quality
management through the attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a
revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08
parts per million (ppm). This new
standard is more stringent than the
previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA
designated, as nonattainment, any area
violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the air quality data for the
three years of 2001–2003. These were
the most recent three years of data at the
time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The
Huntington-Ashland area was
designated as basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment status in a Federal
Register notice signed on April 25, 2004
and published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR
23857). On June 15, 2005 (69 FR at
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
23396), the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was
revoked in the Huntington-Ashland area
(as well as most other areas of the
country). See 40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at
23396 (April 30, 2004); and see 70 FR
44470 (August 3, 2005).
The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two
sets of provisions—subpart 1 and
subpart 2—that address planning and
control requirements for nonattainment
areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as
‘‘basic’’ nonattainment) contains
general, less prescriptive requirements
for nonattainment areas for any
pollutant—including ozone—governed
by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA
refers to as ‘‘classified’’ nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for
ozone nonattainment areas. Some 8hour ozone nonattainment areas are
subject only to the provisions of subpart
1. Other areas are also subject to the
provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA’s 8hour ozone implementation rule, signed
on April 15, 2004, an area was classified
under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour
ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year
average annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration), if it had a 1-hour design
value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest
1-hour design value in the CAA for
subpart 2 requirements). All other areas
are covered under subpart 1, based upon
their 8-hour design values. In 2004, the
Huntington-Ashland area was
designated a basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area based upon air
quality monitoring data from 2001–
2003, and is subject to the requirements
of subpart 1.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour
ozone standard is attained when the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to
0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when
rounding is considered). See 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further
information. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period
must meet data completeness
requirements. The data completeness
requirements are met when the average
percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90
percent, and no single year has less than
75 percent data completeness as
determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR
part 50. The ozone monitoring data
indicates that Huntington has a design
value of 0.081 ppm for the 3-year period
of 2002–2004 and a design value of
design value of 0.076 ppm for the 3-year
period of 2003–2005. The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period
of 2003–2005 indicates that Ashland has
a design value of 0.079 ppm. Therefore,
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39619
the ambient ozone data for the
Huntington-Ashland area indicates no
violations of the 8-hour ozone standard.
Final monitoring data for 2005 indicates
continued attainment of the 8-hour
ozone standard in the HuntingtonAshland area.
B. The Huntington-Ashland Area
The Huntington-Ashland area consists
of Cabell and Wayne Counties, West
Virginia and Boyd County, Kentucky.
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area, the
Huntington-Ashland area was a
maintenance area for the 1-hour ozone
nonattainment NAAQS. See 59 FR
65719 (December 21, 1994).
On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP
requested that Huntington be
redesignated to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. The redesignation
request included 3 years of complete,
quality-assured data for the period of
2002–2004, indicating that the 8-hour
NAAQS for ozone had been achieved in
Huntington. The data satisfies the CAA
requirements when the 3-year average of
the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration (commonly referred to as
the area’s design value) is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when
rounding is considered). Under the
CAA, a nonattainment area may be
redesignated if sufficient complete,
quality-assured data is available to
determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for
Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, allows for
redesignation, providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the
area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and
(5) The State containing such area has
met all requirements applicable to the
area under section 110 and Part D.
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
39620
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
EPA provided guidance on
redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of Title I of the
CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 16,
1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented
this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR
18070). EPA has provided further
guidance on processing redesignation
requests in the following documents:
• ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Design Value Calculations’’,
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18,
1990;
• ‘‘Maintenance Plans for
Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’
Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, April 30, 1992;
• ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from G.
T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1,
1992;
• ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4,
1992;
• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Actions Submitted in Response to Clean
Air Act (Act) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni Director, Air Quality
Management Division, October 28, 1992;
• ‘‘Technical Support Documents
(TSD’s) for Redesignation Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment
Areas,’’ Memorandum from G.T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide
Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, September 17, 1993;
• Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality
Management Division, to Air Division
Directors, Regions 1–10, ‘‘Use of Actual
Emissions in Maintenance
Demonstrations for Ozone and CO
Nonattainment Areas,’’ dated November
30, 1993;
• ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D
NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994;
and
• ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,
Attainment Demonstration, and Related
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’
Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP
requested redesignation of Huntington
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP
submitted a maintenance plan for
Huntington as a SIP revision, to assure
continued attainment over the next 12
years, until 2018. Concurrently, West
Virginia is requesting that EPA approve
the maintenance plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA 175A(b) with
respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance
plan update. EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan to fulfill
the requirement of section 175A(b) for
submission of a maintenance plan
update eight years after Huntington was
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that such
an update must ensure that the
maintenance plan in the SIP provides
maintenance of the NAAQS for a period
of 20 years after an area is initially
redesignated to attainment. EPA can
propose approval because the
maintenance plan, which demonstrates
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2018, also
demonstrates maintenance of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS through 2018, even
though the latter standard is no longer
in effect. Huntington was redesignated
to attainment of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS on December 21, 1994 (59 FR
45985), and, the initial 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan provided for
maintenance through 2005. Ashland
was redesignated to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS on June 29, 1995
(60 FR 33748). Section 51.905(e) of the
‘‘Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour
Requirements—Phase 1’’ April 30, 2004
(69 FR 23999) specifies the conditions
that must be satisfied before EPA may
approve a modification to a 1-hour
maintenance plan which: (1) Removes
the obligation to submit a maintenance
plan for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS eight
years after approval of the initial 1-hour
maintenance plan and/or (2) removes
the obligation to implement contingency
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour
NAAQS. EPA believes that section
51.905(e) of the final rule allows a State
to make either one or both of these
modifications to a 1-hour maintenance
plan SIP once EPA approves a
maintenance plan for the 8-hour
NAAQS. The maintenance plan will not
trigger the contingency plan upon a
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS,
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
but upon a violation of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA believes that the 8-hour
standard is now the proper standard
which should trigger the contingency
plan now that the 1-hour NAAQS has
been revoked and now that approval of
the maintenance plan would allow the
State to remove a violation of the 1-hour
NAAQS obligation from the SIP. EPA
has determined that Huntington has
attained the standard and has met the
requirements for redesignation set forth
in section 107(d)(3)(E).
V. What Would Be the Effect of These
Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request
would change the designation of
Huntington from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also
incorporate into the West Virginia SIP a
maintenance plan ensuring continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
in Huntington for the next 12 years,
until 2018. The maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 8hour NAAQS (should they occur), and
identifies the MVEBs for NOX and VOC
for transportation conformity purposes
for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018.
These MVEBs are displayed in the
following table:
TABLE 1.—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS
BUDGETS IN TONS PER DAY (TPD)
Year
2004 ..................................
2009 ..................................
2018 ..................................
NOX
11.5
8.7
4.1
VOC
6.0
4.6
3.0
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
State’s Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Huntington-Ashland area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and
that all other redesignation criteria have
been met. The following is a description
of how the WVDEP’s May 17, 2006
submittal satisfies the requirements of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
A. The Huntington-Ashland Area Has
Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Huntington-Ashland area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For
ozone, an area may be considered to be
attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if
there are no violations, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and
Appendix I of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring
data. To attain this standard, the 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations measured at each
monitor, within the area, over each year
must not exceed the ozone standard of
0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding
convention described in 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix I, the standard is attained if
the design value is 0.084 ppm or below.
The data must be collected and qualityassured in accordance with 40 CFR part
58, and recorded in the Aerometric
Information Retrieval System (AIRS).
The monitors generally should have
remained at the same location for the
duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
In the Huntington-Ashland area there
is one ozone monitor, located in Cabell
County, West Virginia and one ozone
monitor in Boyd County, Kentucky that
measure air quality with respect to
ozone. As part of its redesignation
request, West Virginia submitted ozone
monitoring data for the years 2002–2005
for the Huntington-Ashland area. This
data has been quality assured and is
recorded in AIRS. The fourth high 8hour daily maximum concentrations,
along with the three-year averages, are
summarized in Tables 2 and 3.
The air quality data for 2003–2005
show that the entire HuntingtonAshland area has attained the standard
with a design value of 0.076 ppm for
Huntington and a design value of 0.079
ppm for Ashland. The data collected at
the Huntington-Ashland area monitors
satisfy the CAA requirement that the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentration is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm. The WVDEP’s
request for redesignation for Huntington
indicates that the data was quality
assured in accordance with 40 CFR part
58. The WVDEP uses AIRS as the
permanent database to maintain its data
and quality assures the data transfers
and content for accuracy. In addition, as
discussed below with respect to the
maintenance plan, WVDEP has
committed to continue monitoring in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In
summary, EPA has determined that the
data submitted by West Virginia and
data taken from AIRS indicates that the
Huntington-Ashland area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Huntington-Ashland Area Has
Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and
Has a Fully Approved SIP Under
TABLE 2.—HUNTINGTON’S FOURTH
HIGHEST 8-HOUR AVERAGE VALUES; Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that Huntington
CABELL MONITOR, AIRS ID 54–
has met all SIP requirements applicable
011–0006
for purposes of this redesignation under
section 110 of the CAA (General SIP
Annual 4th
Year
high reading
Requirements) and that it meets all
(ppm)
applicable SIP requirements under Part
D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance
2002 ....................................
0.097
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition,
2003 ....................................
0.080
EPA has determined that the SIP is fully
2004 ....................................
0.066
approved with respect to all
2005 ....................................
0.082
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
The average for the 3-year period 2002
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
through 2004 is 0.081 ppm.
proposed determinations, EPA
The average for the 3-year period 2003
ascertained what requirements are
through 2005 is 0.076 ppm.
applicable to the Huntington-Ashland
area, and determined that the applicable
TABLE 3.—ASHLAND’S FOURTH HIGH- portions of the SIP meeting these
EST 8-HOUR AVERAGE VALUES; requirements are fully approved under
BOYD MONITOR, AIRS ID 21–019– section 110(k) of the CAA. We note that
SIPs must be fully approved only with
0017
respect to applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni
Annual 4th
memorandum (‘‘Procedures for
Year
high reading
Processing Requests to Redesignate
(ppm)
Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum
2002 ....................................
0.102 from John Calcagni, Director, Air
2003 ....................................
0.088 Quality Management Division,
2004 ....................................
0.068 September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s
2005 ....................................
0.082 interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E)
with respect to the timing of applicable
The average for the 3-year period 2002
requirements. Under this interpretation,
through 2004 is 0.086 ppm.
to qualify for redesignation, States
The average for the 3-year period 2003
requesting redesignation to attainment
through 2005 is 0.079 ppm.
must meet only the relevant CAA
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39621
requirements that came due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation
request. See also Michael Shapiro
memorandum, September 17, 1993, and
60 FR 12459, 12465–66 (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).
Applicable requirements of the CAA
that come due subsequent to the area’s
submittal of a complete redesignation
request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not
required as a prerequisite to
redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 25424,
25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of
St. Louis).
1. Section 110 General SIP
Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for
a SIP, which include enforceable
emissions limitations and other control
measures, means, or techniques,
provisions for the establishment and
operation of appropriate devices
necessary to collect data on ambient air
quality, and programs to enforce the
limitations. The general SIP elements
and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to,
the following:
• Submittal of a SIP that has been
adopted by the State after reasonable
public notice and hearing;
• Provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
• Implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of Part C requirement
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD));
• Provisions for the implementation
of Part D requirements for New Source
Review (NSR) permit programs;
• Provisions for air pollution
modeling; and
• Provisions for public and local
agency participation in planning and
emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a State from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another State. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
States to establish programs to address
transport of air pollutants in accordance
with the NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX
SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and
the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR),
May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161). However,
the section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
a State are not linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
39622
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
classification in that State. EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classifications are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to
a State regardless of the designation of
any one particular area in the State.
Thus, we do not believe that these
requirements should be construed to be
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. In addition, EPA believes
that the other section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked with an
area’s attainment status are not
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. West Virginia and
Kentucky will still be subject to these
requirements after the HuntingtonAshland area is redesignated. The
section 110 and Part D requirements,
which are linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification, are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
policy is consistent with EPA’s existing
policy on applicability of conformity
(i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated
fuels requirement. See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings 61 FR 53174–53176
(October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816 (May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio,
final rulemaking 61 FR 20458 (May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking 60 FR 62748 (December 7,
1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati redesignation 65
FR 37890 (June 19, 2000), and in the
Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001). Similarly, with
respect to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA
noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to
Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS,
that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ‘‘an
‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of
section 110(l) because the NOX rules
apply regardless of an area’s attainment
or nonattainment status for the 8-hour
(or the 1-hour) NAAQS.’’ 69 FR 23951,
23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110
elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
for purposes of redesignation. Any
section 110 requirements that are linked
to the Part D requirements for 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas are not yet
due, because, as we explain later in this
notice, no Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation
under the 8-hour standard became due
prior to submission of the redesignation
request.
Because the West Virginia and
Kentucky SIPs satisfy all of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
applicable general SIP elements and
requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2), EPA concludes that West
Virginia and Kentucky have satisfied the
criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E)
regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area
Requirements Under the 8-Hour
Standard
The Huntington-Ashland area was
designated a basic nonattainment area
for the 8-hour ozone standard. Sections
172–176 of the CAA, found in subpart
1 of Part D, set forth the basic
nonattainment requirements for all
nonattainment areas. As discussed
previously, there are no outstanding
Part D submittals under the 1-hour
standard for this area.
Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of Part D, establishes
additional specific requirements
depending on the area’s nonattainment
classification. The Huntington-Ashland
area was classified as a subpart 1
nonattainment area; therefore, no
subpart 2 requirements apply to this
area.
With respect to the 8-hour standard,
EPA proposes to determine that the
West Virginia and Kentucky SIPs meet
all applicable SIP requirements under
Part D of the CAA, because no 8-hour
ozone standard Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation
became due prior to submission of the
area’s redesignation request. Because
the State submitted a complete
redesignation request for Huntington
prior to the deadline for any
submissions required under the 8-hour
standard, we have determined that the
Part D requirements do not apply to
Huntington for the purposes of
redesignation.
In addition to the fact that Part D
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation did not become due prior
to submission of the redesignation
request, EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the general conformity and
NSR requirements as not requiring
approval prior to redesignation.
With respect to section 176,
Conformity Requirements, section
176(c) of the CAA requires States to
establish criteria and procedures to
ensure that federally supported or
funded projects conform to the air
quality planning goals in the applicable
SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs, and projects
developed, funded or approved under
Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit
Act (‘‘transportation conformity’’) as
well as to all other federally supported
or funded projects (‘‘general
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conformity’’). State conformity revisions
must be consistent with Federal
conformity regulations relating to
consultation, enforcement and
enforceability that the CAA required the
EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) since State
conformity rules are still required after
redesignation and Federal conformity
rules apply where State rules have not
been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265
F.3d 426, 438–440 (6th Cir. 2001),
upholding this interpretation. See also
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
EPA has also determined that areas
being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR
program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect,
because PSD requirements will apply
after redesignation. The rationale for
this view is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ‘‘Part D NSR Requirements or
Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.’’ West Virginia has
demonstrated that the area will be able
to maintain the standard without Part D
NSR in effect in Huntington, and
therefore, West Virginia need not have
a fully approved Part D NSR program
prior to approval of the redesignation
request. West Virginia’s SIP-approved
PSD program will become effective in
Huntington upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit,
MI (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR
20458, 20469–70, May 7, 1996);
Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October
23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61
FR 31834–31837, June 21, 1996).
3. Huntington Has a Fully Approved SIP
for the Purposes of Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the West
Virginia SIP for the purposes of this
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo,
p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth
Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989–
90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional
measures it may approve in conjunction
with a redesignation action. See 68 FR
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein. The Huntington-Ashland area
was a 1-hour maintenance area at the
time of its designation as a basic 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area on April 30,
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
39623
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
2004. Because Huntington was a 1-hour
maintenance area, all previous Part D
SIP submittal requirements were
fulfilled at the time the area was
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS or have been fulfilled
with the submittal of the 8-hour
maintenance plan for the area. See
rulemakings for Huntington, WV (59 FR
45980 at 45981–45982, September 6,
1994); (59 FR 45019, September 6,
1994); and, (59 FR 65719, December 21,
1994). Because there are no outstanding
SIP submission requirements applicable
for the purposes of redesignation of
Huntington, the applicable
implementation plan satisfies all
pertinent SIP requirements. As
indicated previously, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements not connected
with Part D nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. EPA also believes that no
8-hour Part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation have yet
become due for the Huntington-Ashland
area, and therefore they need not be
approved into the SIP prior to
redesignation.
4. The Air Quality Improvement in the
Huntington-Ashland Area Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution
Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
EPA believes that the States have
demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the HuntingtonAshland area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other Stateadopted measures. Emissions reductions
attributable to these rules in Huntington
are shown in Table 4.
TABLE 4.—TOTAL VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS FOR 2002 AND 2004 (TPD)
Year
Point
Area*
Nonroad
Mobile
Total
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Year 2002 ................................................................................................................................
Year 2004 ................................................................................................................................
Diff. (02–04) .............................................................................................................................
1.1
1.3
+0.2
11.7
12.1
+0.4
4.1
4.3
+0.2
6.8
6.0
¥0.8
23.7
23.7
0
12.4
7.4
¥5.0
1.2
1.2
0
14.0
17.3
+3.3
11.4
11.5
+.10
39.0
37.4
¥1.6
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
Year 2002 ................................................................................................................................
Year 2004 ................................................................................................................................
Diff. (02–04) .............................................................................................................................
* Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Between 2002 and 2004, VOC
emissions stayed the same, and NOX
emissions were reduced by 1.6 tpd, due
to the following permanent and
enforceable measures implemented or in
the process of being implemented in
Huntington:
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) National Low Emission Vehicle
(NLEV);
(b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with
new vehicles meeting the Tier 2
standards; and,
(c) Clean Diesel Program.
West Virginia has demonstrated that
the implementation of permanent
enforceable emissions controls have
reduced local VOC and NOX emissions.
All of the reductions in VOC are
attributable to mobile and nonroad
source emission controls such as
federally mandated Tier 2 Vehicle and
Gasoline Sulfur Program and the Clean
Diesel Program.
Nearly all of the reductions in NOX
are attributable to the implementation of
the NOX SIP Call. West Virginia has
indicated in its submittal that the
implementation of the NOX SIP Call,
with its mandatory reductions in NOX
emissions from Electric Generating
Units (EGUs) and large industrial boilers
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
(non-EGUs), reduced NOX emissions
throughout the Huntington-Ashland
area. NOX emissions from EGUs in
Huntington were reduced by 0.3 tpd
between 2002 and 2004. Also, NOX
emissions from non-EGU sources in
Huntington were reduced by 4.7 tpd
between 2002 and 2004. Reductions in
NOX emissions from the
implementation of the NOX SIP Call
from EGUs and non-EGUs in counties
adjacent to the Huntington (Cabell and
Wayne Counties), such as Boyd (the
other county in the Huntington-Ashland
area) and Lawrence Counties in
Kentucky and Putnam County in West
Virginia have also occurred. The
WVDEP believes that the improvement
in ozone air quality from 2002 to 2004
was the result of identifiable, permanent
and enforceable reductions in ozone
precursor emissions for the same period.
Additionally, WVDEP has identified,
but not quantified, additional
reductions in VOC emissions that will
be achieved as a co-benefit of the
reductions in the emission of hazardous
air pollutants (HAPs) as a result of
implementation of EPA’s Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Other regulations, such as the nonroad diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June 29,
2004), the heavy duty engine and
vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002 (January
18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe
standards for automobiles, 65 FR 6698
(January 10, 2000), are also expected to
greatly reduce emissions throughout the
country and thereby reduce emissions
impacting the Huntington-Ashland area
monitors. The Tier 2 standards came
into effect in 2004, and by 2030, EPA
expects that the new Tier 2 standards
will reduce NOX emissions by about 74
percent nationally. EPA believes that
permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions are the cause of the longterm improvement in ozone levels and
are the cause of the Huntington-Ashland
area achieving attainment of the 8-hour
ozone standard.
5. Huntington Has a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate Huntington to attainment
status, West Virginia submitted a SIP
revision to provide for maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Huntington
for at least 12 years after redesignation.
West Virginia is requesting that EPA
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
39624
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
approve this SIP revision as meeting the
requirement of CAA 175A(b) and
replace the 1-hour ozone maintenance
plan update requirement.
Under 40 CFR 51.905(e), the EPA may
approve a SIP revision requesting the
removal of the obligation to implement
contingency measures upon a violation
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the
State submits and EPA approves an
attainment demonstration for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for an area initially
designated nonattainment for the 8-hour
NAAQS or a maintenance SIP for the 8hour NAAQS for an area initially
designated attainment for the 8-hour
NAAQS. The rationale behind 40 CFR
51.905(e) is to ensure that Huntington
maintains the applicable ozone standard
(the 8-hour standard in areas where the
1-hour standard has been revoked). EPA
believes this rationale analogously
applies to areas that were not initially
designated, but are redesignated as
attainment with the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, EPA intends to treat
redesignated areas as though they had
been initially designated attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and
accordingly proposes to relieve
Huntington of its maintenance plan
obligations with respect to the 1-hour
standard. Once approved, the
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for
Huntington meets the requirements of
the CAA regarding maintenance of the
applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after approval of a redesignation of
an area to attainment. Eight years after
the redesignation, the State must submit
a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the next
10-year period following the initial 10year period (12 years in Huntington’s
case). To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, with a schedule
for implementation, as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future 8-hour ozone violations.
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the
elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. The
Calcagni memorandum dated September
4, 1992, provides additional guidance
on the content of a maintenance plan.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
An ozone maintenance plan should
address the following provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions
inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued
attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Huntington Maintenance
Plan
(a) Attainment Inventory—An
attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period
associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. An attainment year
of 2004 was used for Huntington since
it is a reasonable year within the 3-year
block of 2002–2004 and accounts for
reductions attributable to
implementation of the CAA
requirements to date.
The WVDEP prepared comprehensive
VOC and NOX emissions inventories for
Huntington, including point, area,
mobile on-road, and mobile non-road
sources for a base year of 2002.
To develop the NOX and VOC base
year emissions inventories, WVDEP
used the following approaches and
sources of data:
(i) Point source emissions—West
Virginia maintains its point source
emissions inventory data on the iSTEPS database, which is commercial
software purchased from a vendor,
Pacific Environmental Services.
Facilities subject to emissions inventory
reporting requirements were those
operating point sources subject to Title
V permitting requirements. Affected
sources were identified from the
WVDEP’s Regulation 30 database which
is maintained by the WVDEP’s Title V
Permitting Group. For the 2002
inventory, diskettes were populated
with i-STEPS software information, as
well as source-specific data from the
previous year and sent to facilities for
updates of their 2002 activity and
emissions data. The facilities then sent
the diskettes back to the State and,
where WVDEP staff quality assured the
data and submitted it to EPA’s Central
Data Exchange (CDX) site as well as to
contractors for the Visibility
Improvement State and Tribal
Association of the Southeast (VISTAS),
a Regional Planning Organization (RPO).
WVDEP used EPA’s Clean Air
Markets Division (CAMD) actual data to
calculate 2002 summer daily NOX
emissions from EGUs. To calculate
summer weekday NOX emissions
WVDEP used EPA’s CAMD data for the
date range of June 1, 2002 through
August 31, 2002. WVDEP staff filtered
the resulting NOX data to select West
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Virginia sources (Ceredo and Big Sandy
peaking stations). The NOX data was
downloaded, all weekend days were
deleted and the remaining emissions
were added together, and the total was
divided by 65. Since, CAMD data does
not require VOC emissions reporting,
WVDEP used VISTAS summer daily
VOC emissions values for 2002.
(ii) Area source emissions—In order
to calculate the area source emissions
inventory the WVDEP took the annual
values from the VISTAS base year
inventory and derived the typical ozone
summer weekday, using procedures
outlined in the EPA’s Emissions
Modeling Clearinghouse (EMCH)
Memorandum, ‘‘Temporal Allocation of
Annual Emissions Using EMCH
Temporal Profiles, April 29, 2002.’’ This
enabled WVDEP to arrive at the
‘‘typical’’ summer day emissions.
(iii) On-road mobile source
emissions—VISTAS developed 2002 onroad mobile (highway) emissions
inventory data based on vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) updates provided by
WVDEP. VISTAS also estimated future
emissions based upon expected growth
for the future years 2009 and 2018.
However, Federal Transportation
Conformity requirements dictate that
the WVDEP consult with the
Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) responsible for transportation
planning in developing SIP revisions
which may establish motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEB). This applies
to the maintenance plan submitted by
WVDEP on May 17, 2006. Therefore, the
WVDEP has consulted with the
Huntington MPO, the KYOVA Interstate
Planning Commission (KYOVA). The
KYOVA provided base year and
projection emissions data consistent
with their most recent available Travel
Demand Model (TDM) results along
with EPA’s most recent emission factor
model, MOBILE6.2. The WVDEP used
these data to estimate highway
emissions and, in consultation with the
KYOVA, to develop highway emissions
budgets for VOC and NOX. The KYOVA
must evaluate future Long Range
Transportation Plans and
Transportation Improvement Programs
to ensure that the associated emissions
are equal to or less then the final
emissions budgets. The budgets are
designed to facilitate a positive
conformity determination while
ensuring overall maintenance of the 8hour NAAQS. It should be noted that
the MVEBs and budgets only represent
the Huntington, West Virginia (Cabell
and Wayne Counties) portion of the
nonattainment area.
(iv) Mobile non-road emissions—The
2002 mobile non-road emissions
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
39625
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
inventory was developed by WVDEP
staff using the NONROAD2005b Model.
The 2004 attainment year VOC and
NOX emissions Huntington are
summarized along with the 2009 and
2018 projected emissions for
Huntington in tables 5 and 6, which
covers the demonstration of
maintenance for this portion of the area.
EPA has concluded that West Virginia
has adequately derived and documented
the 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX
emissions for Huntington.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration—On
May 17, 2006, the WVDEP submitted a
SIP revision to supplement its May 17,
2006 redesignation request. The
submittal by WVDEP consists of the
maintenance plan as required by section
175A of the CAA. The Huntington plan
shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by demonstrating that current
and future emissions of VOC and NOX
remain at or below the attainment year
2004 emissions levels throughout
Huntington through the year 2018. The
Huntington maintenance demonstration
need not be based on modeling. See
Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir.
2001); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094,
53099–53100 (October 19, 2001), 68 FR
25430–32 (May 12, 2003).
Tables 5 and 6 specify the Huntington
VOC and NOX emissions for 2004, 2009,
and 2018. The WVDEP chose 2009 as an
interim year in the 12-year maintenance
demonstration period to demonstrate
that the VOC and NOX emissions are not
projected to increase above the 2004
attainment level during the time of the
12-year maintenance period.
TABLE 5.—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS FOR 2004–2018 (TPD)
2004 VOC
emissions
Source category
2009 VOC
emissions
2018 VOC
emissions
Mobile 1 ....................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................................................................
Area 2 .......................................................................................................................................................
Point .........................................................................................................................................................
6.0
4.3
12.1
1.3
4.6
3.9
11.2
0.9
3.0
3.2
12.4
1.1
Total 3 ................................................................................................................................................
23.7
20.6
19.7
1 2004
2 Fire
emissions are actual; Emission budgets are established for 2009 and 2018 and include a reallocation from the safety margin.
emissions are assumed to remain constant.
may not total exactly due to rounding.
3 Sums
TABLE 6.—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS 2004–2018 (TPD)
2004 NOX
emissions 1
Source category
2009 NOX
emissions
2018 NOX
emissions
Mobile 1 ....................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................................................................
Area 2 .......................................................................................................................................................
Point .........................................................................................................................................................
11.5
17.3
1.2
7.4
8.7
13.4
1.3
8.1
4.1
12.6
1.5
8.8
Total 3 ................................................................................................................................................
37.4
31.5
27.0
1 2004
2 Fire
emissions are actual; Emission budgets are established for 2009 and 2018 and include a reallocation from the safety margin.
emissions are assumed to remain constant.
may not total exactly due to rounding.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
3 Sums
Additionally, the following mobile
programs are either effective or due to
become effective and will further
contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS:
• Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/
2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006); 66
FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and
• Non-road emissions standards
(2008) and off-road diesel fuel (2007/
2010); 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 2004).
In addition to the permanent and
enforceable measures, CAIR,
promulgated May 12, 2005 (70 FR
25161) should have positive impacts on
West Virginia and Kentucky’s air
quality. CAIR, which will be
implemented in the eastern portion of
the country in two phases (2009 and
2015), should reduce long range
transport of ozone precursors, which
will have a beneficial effect on air
quality in the Huntington-Ashland area.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
Currently, West Virginia is in the
process of adopting rules to address
CAIR through State rules 45CSR39,
45CSR40, and 45CSR41, which require
annual and ozone season NOX
reductions from EGUs and ozone season
NOX reductions from non-EGUs. These
rules will be submitted to EPA as a SIP
revision by September 11, 2006 as
required in the May 12, 2005 (70 FR
25161) Federal Register publication.
Based upon the comparison of the
projected emissions and the attainment
year emissions along with the additional
measures, EPA concludes that WVDEP
has successfully demonstrated that the
8-hour ozone standard should be
maintained in Huntington.
(c) Monitoring Network—There is
currently two monitor measuring ozone
in the Huntington-Ashland area, one in
Cabell County, West Virginia and one in
Boyd County, Kentucky. West Virginia
will continue to operate its current air
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
quality monitor (located in Cabell
County) in accordance with 40 CFR part
58.
(d) Verification of Continued
Attainment—The State of West Virginia
has the legal authority to implement and
enforce specified measures necessary to
attain and maintain the NAAQS.
Additionally, Federal programs such as
Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, 2007
On-Road Diesel Engine Rule, and
Federal Non-road Engine/Equipment
Rules will continue to be implemented
on a national level. These programs help
provide the reductions necessary for the
Huntington-Ashland area to maintain
attainment.
In addition to maintaining the key
elements of its regulatory program, West
Virginia requires ambient and source
emissions data to track attainment and
maintenance. The WVDEP proposes to
fully update its point, area, and mobile
emission inventories at 3-year intervals
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
39626
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
as required by the Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) to
assure that its growth projections
relative to emissions in these areas are
sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing
attainment with the NAAQS. The
WVDEP will review stationary source
VOC and NOX emissions by review of
annual emissions statements and by
update of its emissions inventories. The
area source inventory will be updated
using the same techniques as the 2002
ozone inventory. However, some source
categories may be updated using
historic activity levels determined from
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
data or West Virginia University/
Regional Research Institute (WVU/RRI)
population estimates. The mobile source
inventory model will be updated by
obtaining county-level VMT from the
West Virginia Department of
Transportation (WVDOT) for the subject
year and calculating emissions using the
latest approved MOBILE model.
Alternatively, the motor vehicle
emissions may be obtained in
consultation with the Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO), the
KYOVA, using methodology similar to
that used for Transportation Conformity
purposes. The WVDEP shall also
continue to operate the existing ozone
monitoring stations in the areas
pursuant to 40 CFR 58 throughout the
maintenance period and submit qualityassured ozone data to EPA through the
AIRS system.
(e) The Maintenance Plan’s
Contingency Measures—The
contingency plan provisions are
designed to promptly correct a violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. Section 175A of the Act
requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to ensure that the
State will promptly correct a violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the events that would
‘‘trigger’’ the adoption and
implementation of a contingency
measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and
implemented, and the schedule
indicating the time frame by which the
State would adopt and implement the
measure(s).
The ability of Huntington to stay in
compliance with the 8-hour ozone
standard after redesignation depends
upon VOC and NOX emissions in
Huntington remaining at or below 2004
levels. The State’s maintenance plan
projects VOC and NOX emissions to
decrease and stay below 2004 levels
through the year 2018. The State’s
maintenance plan lays out two
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
situations where the need to adopt and
implement a contingency measure to
further reduce emissions would be
triggered. Those situations are as
follows:
(i) If the triennial inventories indicate
emissions growth in excess of 10 percent
of the 2002 base-year inventory or if a
monitored air quality exceedance
pattern indicates that an ozone NAAQS
violation may be imminent—The
maintenance plan states that an
exceedance pattern would include, but
is not limited to, the measurement of
three exceedances or more occurring at
the same monitor during a calendar
year. The plan also states that
comprehensive tracking inventories will
also be developed every 3 years using
current EPA-approved methods to
assure that its growth projections
relative to emissions in Huntington are
sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing
attainment with the NAAQS. If the 2002
base-year inventory or a monitored air
quality exceedance pattern occurs, the
following measure will be implemented:
• WVDEP will evaluate existing
control measures to ascertain if
additional regulatory revisions are
necessary to maintain the ozone
standard.
(ii) In the event that a violation of the
8-hour ozone standard occurs at either
the Cabell County, West Virginia or the
Boyd County, Kentucky monitor—The
maintenance plan states that in the
event that a violation of the ozone
standard occurs at either the Cabell
County, West Virginia or the Boyd
County, Kentucky ozone monitor, the
State of West Virginia, in consultation
with EPA Region III, will implement
one or more of the following measures
to assure continued attainment:
• Extend the applicability of 45CSR21
(VOC/RACT rule) to include source
categories previously excluded (e.g.,
waste water treatment facilities);
• Revised new source permitting
requirements requiring more stringent
emissions control technology and/or
emissions offsets;
• NOX RACT requirements;
• Regulations to establish plant-wide
emissions caps (potentially with
emissions trading provisions);
• Establish a Public Awareness/
Ozone Action Day Program, a two
pronged program focusing on increasing
the public’s understanding of air quality
issues in the region and increasing
support for actions to improve the air
quality, resulting in reduced emissions
on days when the ozone levels are likely
to be high.
• Initiate one or more of the
following voluntary local control
measures:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(1) Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures—
A series of measures designed to
promote bicycling and walking
including both promotional activities
and enhancing the environment for
these activities;
(2) Reduce Engine Idling—Voluntary
programs to restrict heavy duty diesel
engine idling times for both trucks and
school buses;
(3) Voluntary Partnership with
Ground Freight Industry—A voluntary
program using incentives to encourage
the ground freight industry to reduce
emissions;
(4) Increase Compliance with Open
Burning Restrictions—Increase public
awareness of the existing open burning
restrictions and work with communities
to increase compliance; and
(5) School Bus Engine Retrofit
Program—Have existing school bus
engines retrofitted to lower emissions.
The following schedule for adoption,
implementation and compliance applies
to the contingency measures concerning
the option of implementing regulatory
requirements.
• Confirmation of the monitored
violation within 45 days of occurrence;
• Measure to be selected within 3
months after verification of a monitored
ozone standard violation;
• Develop rule within 6 months of
selection of measure;
• File rule with state secretary
(process takes up to 42 days);
• Applicable regulation to be fully
implemented within 6 months after
adoption.
The following schedule for adoption,
implementation and compliance applies
to the voluntary contingency measures.
• Confirmation of the monitored
violation within 45 days of occurrence;
• Measure to be selected within 3
months after verification of a monitored
ozone standard violation;
• Initiation of program development
with local governments within
Huntington by the start of the following
ozone season.
(f) An Additional Provision of the
Maintenance Plan—The State’s
maintenance plan for Huntington has an
additional provision. That provision
states that based on the 2002 inventory
data and calculation methodology, it is
expected that area and mobile source
emissions would not exhibit substantial
increases between consecutive periodic
year inventories. Therefore, if
significant unanticipated emissions
growth occurs, it is expected that point
sources would be the cause. West
Virginia regulation 45 CSR 29 requires
significant point source emitters in six
counties, including Cabell and Wayne,
to submit annual emission statements
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
39627
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
which contain emission totals for VOCs
and NOX. Any significant increases that
occur can be identified from these
reports without waiting for a periodic
inventory. This gives West Virginia the
capability to identify needed regulations
by source, source category and pollutant
and to begin the rule promulgation
process, if necessary, in an expeditious
manner.
The maintenance plan adequately
addresses the five basic components of
a maintenance plan: attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. EPA believes that the
maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by West Virginia for
Huntington meets the requirements of
section 175A of the Act.
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets Established and Identified in
the Huntington Maintenance Plan
Adequate and Approvable?
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
A. What Are the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)?
Under the CAA, States are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone
areas. These control strategy SIPs (i.e.,
RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration
SIPs) and maintenance plans identify
and establish MVEBs for certain criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to
address pollution from on-road mobile
sources. In the maintenance plan the
MVEBs are termed ‘‘on-road mobile
source emissions budgets.’’ Pursuant to
40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must
be established in an ozone maintenance
plan. An MVEB is the portion of the
total allowable emissions that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions. An MVEB serves as
a ceiling on emissions from an area’s
planned transportation system. The
MVEB concept is further explained in
the preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR
62188). The preamble also describes
how to establish and revise the MVEBs
in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation projects, such as the
construction of new highways, must
‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with)
the part of the State’s air quality plan
that addresses pollution from cars and
trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means
that transportation activities will not
cause new air quality violations, worsen
existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of or reasonable progress
towards the national ambient air quality
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
standards. If a transportation plan does
not ‘‘conform,’’ most new projects that
would expand the capacity of roadways
cannot go forward. Regulations at 40
CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy,
criteria, and procedures for
demonstrating and assuring conformity
of such transportation activities to an
SIP.
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
containing MVEBs, EPA must
affirmatively find the MVEB budget
contained therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in
determining transportation conformity.
After EPA affirmatively finds the
submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, that
MVEB can be used by State and Federal
agencies in determining whether
proposed transportation projects
‘‘conform’’ to the state implementation
plan as required by section 176(c) of the
CAA. EPA’s substantive criteria for
determining ‘‘adequacy’’ of a MVEB are
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). EPA’s
process for determining ‘‘adequacy’’
consists of three basic steps: Public
notification of an SIP submission, a
public comment period, and EPA’s
adequacy finding. This process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in
EPA’s May 14, 1999 guidance,
‘‘Conformity Guidance on
Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.’’ This
guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour
Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas;
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change’’
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA
follows this guidance and rulemaking in
making its adequacy determinations.
The MVEBs for Huntington are listed
in Table 1 of this document for the
2004, 2009, and 2018 years and are the
projected emissions for the on-road
mobile sources plus any portion of the
safety margin allocated to the MVEBs
(safety margin allocation for 2009 and
2018 only). These emission budgets,
when approved by EPA, must be used
for transportation conformity
determinations.
B. What Is a Safety Margin?
A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference
between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the
projected level of emissions (from all
sources) in the maintenance plan. The
attainment level of emissions is the
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
level of emissions during one of the
years in which the area met the NAAQS.
The following example is for the 2018
safety margin: Huntington first attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the
2002 to 2004 time period. The State
used 2004 as the year to determine
attainment levels of emissions for
Huntington. The total emissions from
point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile
non-road sources in 2004 equaled 23.7
tpd of VOC and 37.4 tpd of NOX. The
WVDEP projected emissions out to the
year 2018 and projected a total of 19.7
tpd of VOC and 27.0 tpd of NOX from
all sources in Huntington. The safety
margin for 2018 would be the difference
between these amounts, or 4.0 tpd of
VOC and 10.4 tpd of NOX. The
emissions up to the level of the
attainment year including the safety
margins are projected to maintain the
area’s air quality consistent with the 8hour ozone NAAQS. The safety margin
is the extra emissions reduction below
the attainment levels that can be
allocated for emissions by various
sources as long as the total emission
levels are maintained at or below the
attainment levels. Table 7 shows the
safety margins for the 2009 and 2018
years.
TABLE 7.—2009 AND 2018 SAFETY
MARGINS FOR HUNTINGTON
Inventory year
2004 Attainment ...
2009 Interim ..........
2009 Safety Margin .....................
2004 Attainment ...
2018 Final .............
2018 Safety Margin .....................
VOC emissions
(tpd)
NOX emissions
(tpd)
23.7
20.6
37.4
31.5
3.1
23.7
19.7
5.9
37.4
27.0
4.0
10.4
The WVDEP allocated 1.1 tpd NOX
and 0.6 tpd VOC to the 2009 interim
VOC projected on-road mobile source
emissions projection and the 2009
interim NOX projected on-road mobile
source emissions projection to arrive at
the 2009 MVEBs. For the 2018 MVEBs
the WVDEP allocated 0.5 tpd NOX and
0.4 tpd VOC from the 2018 safety
margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs.
Once allocated to the mobile source
budgets these portions of the safety
margins are no longer available, and
may no longer be allocated to any other
source category. Table 8 shows the final
2009 and 2018 MVEBS for Huntington.
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
39628
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 8.—2009 AND 2018 FINAL MVEBS FOR HUNTINGTON
VOC emissions
(tpd)
Inventory year
2009
2009
2009
2018
2018
2018
4.0
0.6
4.6
2.6
0.4
3.0
7.6
1.1
8.7
3.6
0.5
4.1
projected on-road mobile source projected emissions ..............................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ............................................................................................................
MVEBs ........................................................................................................................................................
projected on-road mobile source projected emissions ..............................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ............................................................................................................
MVEBs ........................................................................................................................................................
C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?
The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for
Huntington are approvable because the
MVEBs for NOX and VOC, including the
allocated safety margins, continue to
maintain the total emissions at or below
the attainment year inventory levels as
required by the transportation
conformity regulations.
D. What Is the Adequacy and Approval
Process for the MVEBs in the
Huntington Maintenance Plan?
The MVEBs for the Huntington
maintenance plan are being posted to
EPA’s conformity Web site concurrent
with this proposal. The public comment
period will end at the same time as the
public comment period for this
proposed rule. In this case, EPA is
concurrently processing the action on
the maintenance plan and the adequacy
process for the MVEBs contained
therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is
proposing to find the MVEBs adequate
and also proposing to approve the
MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan.
The MVEBs cannot be used for
transportation conformity until the
maintenance plan update and associated
MVEBs are approved in a final Federal
Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds
the budgets adequate in a separate
action following the comment period.
If EPA receives adverse written
comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Huntington MVEBs, or
any other aspect of our proposed
approval of this updated maintenance
plan, we will respond to the comments
on the MVEBs in our final action or
proceed with the adequacy process as a
separate action. Our action on the
Huntington MVEBs will also be
announced on EPA’s conformity Web
site: https://www.epa.gov/oms/traq,
(once there, click on the ‘‘Conformity’’
button, then look for ‘‘Adequacy Review
of SIP Submissions for Conformity’’).
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
NOX emissions
(tpd)
VIII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Huntington-Ashland area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
is also proposing to approve the
redesignation of the Huntington portion
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
of the Huntington-Ashland area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has evaluated
West Virginia’s redesignation request
and determined that it meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes
that the redesignation request and
monitoring data demonstrate that the
Huntington-Ashland area has attained
the 8-hour ozone standard. The final
approval of this redesignation request
would change the designation of
Huntington from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance
plan for Huntington, submitted on May
17, 2006, as a revision to the West
Virginia SIP. EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan for
Huntington because it meets the
requirements of section 175A as
described previously in this notice. EPA
is also proposing to approve the MVEBs
submitted by West Virginia for
Huntington in conjunction with its
redesignation request. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before
taking final action.
IX. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is
also not subject to Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)). This action merely proposes
to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Redesignation of an area to
attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of
the Clean Air Act does not impose any
new requirements on small entities.
Redesignation is an action that affects
the status of a geographical area and
does not impose any new regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements on sources. Redesignation
of an area to attainment under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does
not impose any new requirements on
small entities. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose
any new regulatory requirements on
sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under State law and does
not impose any additional enforceable
duty beyond that required by State law,
it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). This proposed
rule also does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will
it have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it merely
proposes to affect the status of a
geographical area, does not impose any
new requirements on sources, or allow
the State to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements, and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 134 / Thursday, July 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose
any new requirements on sources. Thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA
has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of
the rule in accordance with the
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive
order. This rule proposing to approve
the redesignation of the Huntington area
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, and the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This rule proposing to approve the
redesignation of Huntington to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, and the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen oxides,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National Parks,
Wilderness Areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:46 Jul 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
Dated: July 6, 2006.
William T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6–11042 Filed 7–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 401
[USCG–2006–24414]
RIN 1625–AB05
Rates for Pilotage on the Great Lakes
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing
to update the rates for pilotage on the
Great Lakes. Based on our review we
propose to adjust the pilotage rates an
average of 6% for the 2006 shipping
season to generate sufficient revenue to
cover allowable expenses, target pilot
compensation, and returns on
investment.
Comments and related material
must reach the Docket Management
Facility on or before August 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: To make sure your
comments and related material are not
entered more than once in the docket,
please submit them by only one of the
following means:
(1) By mail to the Docket Management
Facility (USCG–2006–24414), U.S.
Department of Transportation, room PL–
401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
(2) By delivery to room PL–401 on the
Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The telephone number is 202–366–
9329.
(3) By fax to the Docket Management
Facility at 202–493–2251.
(4) Electronically through the Web
site for the Docket Management System
at https://dms.dot.gov.
The Docket Management Facility
maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and will be
available for inspection or copying at
room PL–401 on the Plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39629
except Federal holidays. You may also
find this docket on the Internet at
https://dms.dot.gov. Anyone is able to
search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our
dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT’s complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000
(Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–
78), or you may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions on this proposed rule, call Mr.
Michael Sakaio, Program Analyst, Office
of Great Lakes Pilotage, Commandant
(G–PWM), U.S. Coast Guard, at 202–
372–1538, by fax 202–372–1929, or by
e-mail at msakaio@comdt.uscg.mil. For
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Chief, Dockets, Department of
Transportation, telephone 202–493–
0402.
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
A. Submitting Comments
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
C. Public Meeting
D. Privacy Act
II. Program History
III. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Pilotage Rate Changes—
Summarized
B. Calculating the Rate Adjustment
Step 1: Calculating the Base Period Total
Economic Cost (Cost per Bridge Hour by
Area for the Base Period)
Step 2. Calculating the Expense Multiplier
Step 3. Calculating the new annual
‘‘projection of target pilot compensation’’
using the same procedures found in Step
2 of Appendix A to 46 CFR part 404.
Step 4: Increase the new total target pilot
compensation in Step 3 by the expense
multiplier in Step 2.
Step 5(a): Adjust the result in Step 4, as
required, for inflation or deflation.
Step 5(b): Calculate Projected Total
Economic Costs.
Step 6: Divide the Result in Step 5(b) by
Projected Bridge Hours to Determine
Total Unit Costs (Adjusted Cost per
Bridge Hour by Area).
Step 7: Divide prospective unit costs in
Step 6 by the base period unit costs in
Step 1.
Step 8: Adjust the base period rates by the
percentage change in unit costs in Step
7.
IV. Regulatory Evaluation
A. Small Entities
B. Assistance for Small Entities
C. Collection of Information
D. Federalism
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Taking of Private Property
G. Civil Justice Reform
H. Protection of Children
E:\FR\FM\13JYP1.SGM
13JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 134 (Thursday, July 13, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39618-39629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-11042]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0485; FRL-8196-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Redesignation of the Huntington, WV Portion of the
Huntington-Ashland 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and
Approval of the Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the Huntington portion of
the Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY (herein referred to as the ``Huntington-
Ashland area'') interstate area from nonattainment to attainment of the
8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The West
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) is requesting
that the Cabell and Wayne County, West Virginia (Huntington) portion of
the Huntington-Ashland area be redesignated as attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. The interstate Huntington-Ashland 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area is comprised of three counties (Cabell and Wayne
Counties, West Virginia and Boyd County, Kentucky). EPA is proposing to
approve the ozone redesignation request for the Huntington portion of
the Huntington-Ashland area. In conjunction with its redesignation
request, the WVDEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance
plan for Huntington that provides for continued attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS for the next 12 years. EPA is proposing to make a
determination that Huntington has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based
upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality ozone
monitoring data for 2003-2005. EPA's proposed approval of the 8-hour
ozone redesignation request is based on its determination that
Huntington has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is providing information on
the status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Huntington maintenance plan
for purposes of transportation conformity, and is also proposing to
approve those MVEBs. EPA is proposing approval of the redesignation
request and of the maintenance plan revision to the West Virginia SIP
in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0485 by one of the following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPAR03-OAR-2006-0485, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, D. Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
E. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2006-0485. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov
Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA
without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If
you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE,
Charleston, WV 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Caprio, (215) 814-2156, or by e-
mail at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Huntington Maintenance Plan Adequate and
Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
1. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?
On May 17, 2006, WVDEP formally submitted a request to redesignate
Huntington from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone. On May 17, 2006, West Virginia submitted a maintenance plan for
Huntington as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment over the
next 12 years. Huntington is comprised of Cabell and Wayne Counties.
Huntington is currently designated as a basic 8-hour
[[Page 39619]]
ozone nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to determine that Huntington
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that it has met the
requirements for redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
CAA. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the redesignation request
to change the designation of Huntington from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve
the maintenance plan SIP revision for Huntington, such approval being
one of the CAA requirements for approval of a redesignation request.
The maintenance plan is designed to ensure continued attainment
throughout the Huntington-Ashland area for the next 12 years.
Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for
the MVEBs identified in the Huntington maintenance plan, and proposing
to approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds (VOC)
and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for transportation conformity
purposes. These MVEBs are State MVEBs for the West Virginia portion of
the Huntington-Ashland 8-hour ozone area. In a separate submittal, the
Commonwealth of Kentucky is establishing MVEBs for the remainder of
this area (i.e., Boyd County). Concurrently, the State is requesting
that EPA approve the maintenance plan as meeting the requirements of
CAA 175A(b) with respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update.
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process
for air quality management through the attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA designated, as
nonattainment, any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the
air quality data for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most
recent three years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The
Huntington-Ashland area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment status in a Federal Register notice signed on April 25,
2004 and published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). On June 15, 2005
(69 FR at 23396), the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked in the Huntington-
Ashland area (as well as most other areas of the country). See 40 CFR
50.9(b); 69 FR at 23396 (April 30, 2004); and see 70 FR 44470 (August
3, 2005).
The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of provisions--subpart
1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control requirements for
nonattainment areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic''
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a
NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Some
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject only to the provisions of
subpart 1. Other areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 2.
Under EPA's 8-hour ozone implementation rule, signed on April 15, 2004,
an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone design
value (i.e., the 3-year average annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentration), if it had a 1-hour design value at
or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in the CAA for
subpart 2 requirements). All other areas are covered under subpart 1,
based upon their 8-hour design values. In 2004, the Huntington-Ashland
area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based upon
air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003, and is subject to the
requirements of subpart 1.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). See 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further information. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements. The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. The ozone
monitoring data indicates that Huntington has a design value of 0.081
ppm for the 3-year period of 2002-2004 and a design value of design
value of 0.076 ppm for the 3-year period of 2003-2005. The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2003-2005 indicates that
Ashland has a design value of 0.079 ppm. Therefore, the ambient ozone
data for the Huntington-Ashland area indicates no violations of the 8-
hour ozone standard. Final monitoring data for 2005 indicates continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in the Huntington-Ashland area.
B. The Huntington-Ashland Area
The Huntington-Ashland area consists of Cabell and Wayne Counties,
West Virginia and Boyd County, Kentucky. Prior to its designation as an
8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the Huntington-Ashland area was a
maintenance area for the 1-hour ozone nonattainment NAAQS. See 59 FR
65719 (December 21, 1994).
On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP requested that Huntington be
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2002-2004, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved in Huntington. The data satisfies the CAA
requirements when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration (commonly referred to as the
area's design value) is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm
when rounding is considered). Under the CAA, a nonattainment area may
be redesignated if sufficient complete, quality-assured data is
available to determine that the area has attained the standard and the
area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements set forth in
section 107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA,
allows for redesignation, providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
(5) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.
[[Page 39620]]
EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28,
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following documents:
``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'',
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 1990;
``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in
Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John
Calcagni Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17,
1993;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10,
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration,
and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S.
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10,
1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP requested redesignation of Huntington to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP
submitted a maintenance plan for Huntington as a SIP revision, to
assure continued attainment over the next 12 years, until 2018.
Concurrently, West Virginia is requesting that EPA approve the
maintenance plan as meeting the requirements of CAA 175A(b) with
respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update. EPA is proposing
to approve the maintenance plan to fulfill the requirement of section
175A(b) for submission of a maintenance plan update eight years after
Huntington was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA believes that such an update must ensure that the maintenance plan
in the SIP provides maintenance of the NAAQS for a period of 20 years
after an area is initially redesignated to attainment. EPA can propose
approval because the maintenance plan, which demonstrates maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2018, also demonstrates maintenance
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS through 2018, even though the latter standard
is no longer in effect. Huntington was redesignated to attainment of
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS on December 21, 1994 (59 FR 45985), and, the
initial 1-hour ozone maintenance plan provided for maintenance through
2005. Ashland was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
on June 29, 1995 (60 FR 33748). Section 51.905(e) of the ``Final Rule
To Implement the 8-Hour Requirements--Phase 1'' April 30, 2004 (69 FR
23999) specifies the conditions that must be satisfied before EPA may
approve a modification to a 1-hour maintenance plan which: (1) Removes
the obligation to submit a maintenance plan for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
eight years after approval of the initial 1-hour maintenance plan and/
or (2) removes the obligation to implement contingency measures upon a
violation of the 1-hour NAAQS. EPA believes that section 51.905(e) of
the final rule allows a State to make either one or both of these
modifications to a 1-hour maintenance plan SIP once EPA approves a
maintenance plan for the 8-hour NAAQS. The maintenance plan will not
trigger the contingency plan upon a violation of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS, but upon a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes
that the 8-hour standard is now the proper standard which should
trigger the contingency plan now that the 1-hour NAAQS has been revoked
and now that approval of the maintenance plan would allow the State to
remove a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS obligation from the SIP. EPA has
determined that Huntington has attained the standard and has met the
requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the designation
of Huntington from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate into the West
Virginia SIP a maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in Huntington for the next 12 years, until 2018. The
maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy any future
violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the
MVEBs for NOX and VOC for transportation conformity purposes
for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018. These MVEBs are displayed in the
following table:
Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004.................................................. 11.5 6.0
2009.................................................. 8.7 4.6
2018.................................................. 4.1 3.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Huntington-Ashland area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation
criteria have been met. The following is a description of how the
WVDEP's May 17, 2006 submittal satisfies the requirements of section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
A. The Huntington-Ashland Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the Huntington-Ashland area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered
to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50,
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily
[[Page 39621]]
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor,
within the area, over each year must not exceed the ozone standard of
0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm
or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Aerometric Information
Retrieval System (AIRS). The monitors generally should have remained at
the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required
for demonstrating attainment.
In the Huntington-Ashland area there is one ozone monitor, located
in Cabell County, West Virginia and one ozone monitor in Boyd County,
Kentucky that measure air quality with respect to ozone. As part of its
redesignation request, West Virginia submitted ozone monitoring data
for the years 2002-2005 for the Huntington-Ashland area. This data has
been quality assured and is recorded in AIRS. The fourth high 8-hour
daily maximum concentrations, along with the three-year averages, are
summarized in Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2.--Huntington's Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values; Cabell
Monitor, AIRS ID 54-011-0006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 4th
Year high reading
(ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002................................................... 0.097
2003................................................... 0.080
2004................................................... 0.066
2005................................................... 0.082
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average for the 3-year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.081 ppm.
The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.076 ppm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3.--Ashland's Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values; Boyd Monitor,
AIRS ID 21-019-0017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 4th
Year high reading
(ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002................................................... 0.102
2003................................................... 0.088
2004................................................... 0.068
2005................................................... 0.082
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average for the 3-year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.086 ppm.
The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.079 ppm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the entire Huntington-
Ashland area has attained the standard with a design value of 0.076 ppm
for Huntington and a design value of 0.079 ppm for Ashland. The data
collected at the Huntington-Ashland area monitors satisfy the CAA
requirement that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to
0.08 ppm. The WVDEP's request for redesignation for Huntington
indicates that the data was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. The WVDEP uses AIRS as the permanent database to maintain its
data and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy.
In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan,
WVDEP has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by West
Virginia and data taken from AIRS indicates that the Huntington-Ashland
area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Huntington-Ashland Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements
Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that Huntington has met all SIP requirements
applicable for purposes of this redesignation under section 110 of the
CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all applicable SIP
requirements under Part D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP
is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
In making these proposed determinations, EPA ascertained what
requirements are applicable to the Huntington-Ashland area, and
determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these
requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. We
note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable
requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable requirements.
Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, States
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete
redesignation request. See also Michael Shapiro memorandum, September
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due
subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request
remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not
required as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR
25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations.
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the following:
Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for
the implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));
Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
Provisions for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain States to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October
27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May
14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161). However, the
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area's designation and
[[Page 39622]]
classification in that State. EPA believes that the requirements linked
with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classifications
are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a State regardless of the designation of any one
particular area in the State.
Thus, we do not believe that these requirements should be construed
to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. In
addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation. West Virginia and Kentucky will still be subject to
these requirements after the Huntington-Ashland area is redesignated.
The section 110 and Part D requirements, which are linked with a
particular area's designation and classification, are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. This policy
is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity
(i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings 61 FR 53174-53176
(October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816 (May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain,
Ohio, final rulemaking 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida,
final rulemaking 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995). See also the
discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation 65 FR 37890
(June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001). Similarly, with respect to the NOX SIP
Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS, that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ``an
`applicable requirement' for purposes of section 110(l) because the
NOX rules apply regardless of an area's attainment or
nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR
23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request.
Because the West Virginia and Kentucky SIPs satisfy all of the
applicable general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2), EPA concludes that West Virginia and Kentucky have satisfied
the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
The Huntington-Ashland area was designated a basic nonattainment
area for the 8-hour ozone standard. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found
in subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements
for all nonattainment areas. As discussed previously, there are no
outstanding Part D submittals under the 1-hour standard for this area.
Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of Part D, establishes
additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment
classification. The Huntington-Ashland area was classified as a subpart
1 nonattainment area; therefore, no subpart 2 requirements apply to
this area.
With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that
the West Virginia and Kentucky SIPs meet all applicable SIP
requirements under Part D of the CAA, because no 8-hour ozone standard
Part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation became due
prior to submission of the area's redesignation request. Because the
State submitted a complete redesignation request for Huntington prior
to the deadline for any submissions required under the 8-hour standard,
we have determined that the Part D requirements do not apply to
Huntington for the purposes of redesignation.
In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the
redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the
general conformity and NSR requirements as not requiring approval prior
to redesignation.
With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section
176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and procedures
to ensure that federally supported or funded projects conform to the
air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and
projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the
Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as well as to all
other federally supported or funded projects (``general conformity'').
State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) since State conformity rules
are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules
apply where State rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265
F.3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See
also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect, because PSD requirements will
apply after redesignation. The rationale for this view is described in
a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' West Virginia has
demonstrated that the area will be able to maintain the standard
without Part D NSR in effect in Huntington, and therefore, West
Virginia need not have a fully approved Part D NSR program prior to
approval of the redesignation request. West Virginia's SIP-approved PSD
program will become effective in Huntington upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, MI (60 FR 12467-12468, March
7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR 20458, 20469-70, May 7,
1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids,
Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
3. Huntington Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of
Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the West Virginia SIP for the purposes of
this redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25425
(May 12, 2003) and citations therein. The Huntington-Ashland area was a
1-hour maintenance area at the time of its designation as a basic 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area on April 30,
[[Page 39623]]
2004. Because Huntington was a 1-hour maintenance area, all previous
Part D SIP submittal requirements were fulfilled at the time the area
was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS or have been
fulfilled with the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for the
area. See rulemakings for Huntington, WV (59 FR 45980 at 45981-45982,
September 6, 1994); (59 FR 45019, September 6, 1994); and, (59 FR
65719, December 21, 1994). Because there are no outstanding SIP
submission requirements applicable for the purposes of redesignation of
Huntington, the applicable implementation plan satisfies all pertinent
SIP requirements. As indicated previously, EPA believes that the
section 110 elements not connected with Part D nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. EPA also
believes that no 8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation have yet become due for the Huntington-Ashland area, and
therefore they need not be approved into the SIP prior to
redesignation.
4. The Air Quality Improvement in the Huntington-Ashland Area Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control
Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
EPA believes that the States have demonstrated that the observed
air quality improvement in the Huntington-Ashland area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted
measures. Emissions reductions attributable to these rules in
Huntington are shown in Table 4.
Table 4.--Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2004 (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point Area* Nonroad Mobile Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002...................................................... 1.1 11.7 4.1 6.8 23.7
Year 2004...................................................... 1.3 12.1 4.3 6.0 23.7
Diff. (02-04).................................................. +0.2 +0.4 +0.2 -0.8 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002...................................................... 12.4 1.2 14.0 11.4 39.0
Year 2004...................................................... 7.4 1.2 17.3 11.5 37.4
Diff. (02-04).................................................. -5.0 0 +3.3 +.10 -1.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.
Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions stayed the same, and
NOX emissions were reduced by 1.6 tpd, due to the following
permanent and enforceable measures implemented or in the process of
being implemented in Huntington:
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV);
(b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with new vehicles meeting the Tier
2 standards; and,
(c) Clean Diesel Program.
West Virginia has demonstrated that the implementation of permanent
enforceable emissions controls have reduced local VOC and
NOX emissions. All of the reductions in VOC are attributable
to mobile and nonroad source emission controls such as federally
mandated Tier 2 Vehicle and Gasoline Sulfur Program and the Clean
Diesel Program.
Nearly all of the reductions in NOX are attributable to
the implementation of the NOX SIP Call. West Virginia has
indicated in its submittal that the implementation of the
NOX SIP Call, with its mandatory reductions in
NOX emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and
large industrial boilers (non-EGUs), reduced NOX emissions
throughout the Huntington-Ashland area. NOX emissions from
EGUs in Huntington were reduced by 0.3 tpd between 2002 and 2004. Also,
NOX emissions from non-EGU sources in Huntington were
reduced by 4.7 tpd between 2002 and 2004. Reductions in NOX
emissions from the implementation of the NOX SIP Call from
EGUs and non-EGUs in counties adjacent to the Huntington (Cabell and
Wayne Counties), such as Boyd (the other county in the Huntington-
Ashland area) and Lawrence Counties in Kentucky and Putnam County in
West Virginia have also occurred. The WVDEP believes that the
improvement in ozone air quality from 2002 to 2004 was the result of
identifiable, permanent and enforceable reductions in ozone precursor
emissions for the same period.
Additionally, WVDEP has identified, but not quantified, additional
reductions in VOC emissions that will be achieved as a co-benefit of
the reductions in the emission of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) as a
result of implementation of EPA's Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(MACT) standards.
Other regulations, such as the non-road diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June
29, 2004), the heavy duty engine and vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002
(January 18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe standards for
automobiles, 65 FR 6698 (January 10, 2000), are also expected to
greatly reduce emissions throughout the country and thereby reduce
emissions impacting the Huntington-Ashland area monitors. The Tier 2
standards came into effect in 2004, and by 2030, EPA expects that the
new Tier 2 standards will reduce NOX emissions by about 74
percent nationally. EPA believes that permanent and enforceable
emissions reductions are the cause of the long-term improvement in
ozone levels and are the cause of the Huntington-Ashland area achieving
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.
5. Huntington Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to redesignate Huntington to
attainment status, West Virginia submitted a SIP revision to provide
for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Huntington for at least 12
years after redesignation. West Virginia is requesting that EPA
[[Page 39624]]
approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirement of CAA 175A(b) and
replace the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update requirement.
Under 40 CFR 51.905(e), the EPA may approve a SIP revision
requesting the removal of the obligation to implement contingency
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the State
submits and EPA approves an attainment demonstration for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for an area initially designated nonattainment for the 8-
hour NAAQS or a maintenance SIP for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area
initially designated attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS. The rationale
behind 40 CFR 51.905(e) is to ensure that Huntington maintains the
applicable ozone standard (the 8-hour standard in areas where the 1-
hour standard has been revoked). EPA believes this rationale
analogously applies to areas that were not initially designated, but
are redesignated as attainment with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore,
EPA intends to treat redesignated areas as though they had been
initially designated attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and
accordingly proposes to relieve Huntington of its maintenance plan
obligations with respect to the 1-hour standard. Once approved, the
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP
for Huntington meets the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance
of the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a
redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the
next 10-year period following the initial 10-year period (12 years in
Huntington's case). To address the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency
measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems necessary to
assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone violations. Section
175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas
seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni
memorandum dated September 4, 1992, provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address
the following provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Huntington Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment Inventory--An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. An attainment year of 2004 was used for Huntington
since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year block of 2002-2004 and
accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of the CAA
requirements to date.
The WVDEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOX emissions
inventories for Huntington, including point, area, mobile on-road, and
mobile non-road sources for a base year of 2002.
To develop the NOX and VOC base year emissions
inventories, WVDEP used the following approaches and sources of data:
(i) Point source emissions--West Virginia maintains its point
source emissions inventory data on the i-STEPS database, which is
commercial software purchased from a vendor, Pacific Environmental
Services. Facilities subject to emissions inventory reporting
requirements were those operating point sources subject to Title V
permitting requirements. Affected sources were identified from the
WVDEP's Regulation 30 database which is maintained by the WVDEP's Title
V Permitting Group. For the 2002 inventory, diskettes were populated
with i-STEPS software information, as well as source-specific data from
the previous year and sent to facilities for updates of their 2002
activity and emissions data. The facilities then sent the diskettes
back to the State and, where WVDEP staff quality assured the data and
submitted it to EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) site as well as to
contractors for the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association
of the Southeast (VISTAS), a Regional Planning Organization (RPO).
WVDEP used EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) actual data to
calculate 2002 summer daily NOX emissions from EGUs. To
calculate summer weekday NOX emissions WVDEP used EPA's CAMD
data for the date range of June 1, 2002 through August 31, 2002. WVDEP
staff filtered the resulting NOX data to select West
Virginia sources (Ceredo and Big Sandy peaking stations). The
NOX data was downloaded, all weekend days were deleted and
the remaining emissions were added together, and the total was divided
by 65. Since, CAMD data does not require VOC emissions reporting, WVDEP
used VISTAS summer daily VOC emissions values for 2002.
(ii) Area source emissions--In order to calculate the area source
emissions inventory the WVDEP took the annual values from the VISTAS
base year inventory and derived the typical ozone summer weekday, using
procedures outlined in the EPA's Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse
(EMCH) Memorandum, ``Temporal Allocation of Annual Emissions Using EMCH
Temporal Profiles, April 29, 2002.'' This enabled WVDEP to arrive at
the ``typical'' summer day emissions.
(iii) On-road mobile source emissions--VISTAS developed 2002 on-
road mobile (highway) emissions inventory data based on vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) updates provided by WVDEP. VISTAS also estimated future
emissions based upon expected growth for the future years 2009 and
2018. However, Federal Transportation Conformity requirements dictate
that the WVDEP consult with the Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) responsible for transportation planning in developing SIP
revisions which may establish motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB).
This applies to the maintenance plan submitted by WVDEP on May 17,
2006. Therefore, the WVDEP has consulted with the Huntington MPO, the
KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission (KYOVA). The KYOVA provided base
year and projection emissions data consistent with their most recent
available Travel Demand Model (TDM) results along with EPA's most
recent emission factor model, MOBILE6.2. The WVDEP used these data to
estimate highway emissions and, in consultation with the KYOVA, to
develop highway emissions budgets for VOC and NOX. The KYOVA
must evaluate future Long Range Transportation Plans and Transportation
Improvement Programs to ensure that the associated emissions are equal
to or less then the final emissions budgets. The budgets are designed
to facilitate a positive conformity determination while ensuring
overall maintenance of the 8-hour NAAQS. It should be noted that the
MVEBs and budgets only represent the Huntington, West Virginia (Cabell
and Wayne Counties) portion of the nonattainment area.
(iv) Mobile non-road emissions--The 2002 mobile non-road emissions
[[Page 39625]]
inventory was developed by WVDEP staff using the NONROAD2005b Model.
The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions
Huntington are summarized along with the 2009 and 2018 projected
emissions for Huntington in tables 5 and 6, which covers the
demonstration of maintenance for this portion of the area. EPA has
concluded that West Virginia has adequately derived and documented the
2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for Huntington.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration--On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP submitted
a SIP revision to supplement its May 17, 2006 redesignation request.
The submittal by WVDEP consists of the maintenance plan as required by
section 175A of the CAA. The Huntington plan shows maintenance of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and future emissions
of VOC and NOX remain at or below the attainment year 2004
emissions levels throughout Huntington through the year 2018. The
Huntington maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See
Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d
537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19,
2001), 68 FR 25430-32 (May 12, 2003).
Tables 5 and 6 specify the Huntington VOC and NOX
emissions for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The WVDEP chose 2009 as an interim
year in the 12-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate
that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected to increase
above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the 12-year
maintenance period.
Table 5.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 VOC 2009 VOC 2018 VOC
Source category emissions emissions emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile \1\....................... 6.0 4.6 3.0
Nonroad.......................... 4.3 3.9 3.2
Area \2\......................... 12.1 11.2 12.4
Point............................ 1.3 0.9 1.1
--------------------------------------
Total \3\.................... 23.7 20.6 19.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2004 emissions are actual; Emission budgets are established for 2009
and 2018 and include a reallocation from the safety margin.
\2\ Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.
\3\ Sums may not total exactly due to rounding.
Table 6.--Total NOX Emissions 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 NOX
Source category emissions 2009 NOX 2018 NOX
\1\ emissions emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile \1\....................... 11.5 8.7 4.1
Nonroad.......................... 17.3 13.4 12.6
Area \2\......................... 1.2 1.3 1.5
Point............................ 7.4 8.1 8.8
������������������������������������������������������������������������
Total \3\.................... 37.4 31.5 27.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2004 emissions are actual; Emission budgets are established for 2009
and 2018 and include a reallocation from the safety margin.
\2\ Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.
\3\ Sums may not total exactly due to rounding.
Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or
due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-
road (2006); 66 FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and
Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel
fuel (2007/2010); 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 2004).
In addition to the permanent and enforceable measures, CAIR,
promulgated May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161) should have positive impacts on
West Virginia and Kentucky's air quality. CAIR, which will be
implemented in the eastern portion of the country in two phases (2009
and 2015), should reduce long range transport of ozone precursors,
which will have a beneficial effect on air quality in the Huntington-
Ashland area.
Currently, West Virginia is in the process of adopting rules to
address CAIR through State rules 45CSR39, 45CSR40, and 45CSR41, which
require annual and ozone season NOX reductions from EGUs and
ozone season NOX reductions from non-EGUs. These rules will
be submitted to EPA as a SIP revision by September 11, 2006 as required
in the May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161) Federal Register publication.
Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the
attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA
concludes that WVDEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour
ozone standard should be maintained in Huntington.
(c) Monitoring Network--There is currently two monitor measuring
ozone in the Huntington-Ashland area, one in Cabell County, West
Virginia and one in Boyd County, Kentucky. West Virginia will continue
to operate its current air quality monitor (located in Cabell County)
in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
(d) Verification of Continued Attainment--The State of West
Virginia has the legal authority to implement and enforce specified
measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Additionally,
Federal programs such as Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, 2007 On-Road
Diesel Engine Rule, and Federal Non-road Engine/Equipment Rules will
continue to be implemented on a national level. These programs help
provide the reductions necessary for the Huntington-Ashland area to
maintain attainment.
In addition to maintaining the key elements of its regulatory
program, West Virginia requires ambient and source emissions data to
track attainment and maintenance. The WVDEP proposes to fully update
its point, area, and mobile emission inventories at 3-year intervals
[[Page 39626]]
as required by the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) to
assure that its growth projections relative to emissions in these areas
are sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing attainment with the NAAQS.
The WVDEP will review stationary source VOC and NOX
emissions by review of annual emissions statements and by update of its
emissions inventories. The area source inventory will be updated using
the same techniques as the 2002 ozone inventory. However, some source
categories may be updated using historic activity levels determined
from Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data or West Virginia
University/Regional Research Institute (WVU/RRI) population estimates.
The mobile source inventory model will be updated by obtaining county-
level VMT from the West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT)
for the subject year and calculating emissions using the latest
approved MOBILE model. Alternatively, the motor vehicle emissions may
be obtained in consultation with the Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO), the KYOVA, using methodology similar to that used for
Transportation Conformity purposes. The WVDEP shall also continue to
operate the existing ozone monitoring stations in the areas pursuant to
40 CFR 58 throughout the maintenance period and submit quality-assured
ozone data to EPA through the AIRS system.
(e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency Measures--The contingency
plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of the Act requires
that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should
identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the State would adopt and implement the measure(s).
The ability of Huntington to stay in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOX
emissions in Huntington remaining at or below 2004 levels. The State's
maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX emissions to decrease
and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018. The State's
maintenance plan lays out two situations where the need to adopt and
implement a contingency measure to further reduce emissions would be
triggered. Those situations are as follows:
(i) If the triennial inventories indicate emissions growth in
excess of 10 percent of the 2002 base-year inventory or if a monitored
air quality exceedance pattern indicates that an ozone NAAQS violation
may be imminent--The maintenance plan states that an exceedance pattern
would include, but is not limited to, the measurement of three
exceedances or more occurring at the same monitor during a calendar
year. The plan also states that comprehensive tracking inventories will
also be developed every 3 years using current EPA-approved methods to
assure that its growth projections relative to emissions in Huntington
are sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing attainment with the NAAQS.
If the 2002 base-year inventory or a monitored air quality exceedance
pattern occurs, the following measure will be implemented:
WVDEP will evaluate existing control measures to ascertain
if additional regulatory revisions are necessary to maintain the ozone
standard.
(ii) In the event that a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard
occurs at either the Cabell County, West Virginia or the Boyd County,
Kentucky monitor--The maintenance plan states that in the event that a
violation of the ozone standard occurs at either the Cabell County,
West Virginia or the Boyd County, Kentucky ozone monitor, the State of
West Virginia, in consultation with EPA Region III, will implement one
or more of the following measures to assure continued attainment:
Extend the applicability of 45CSR21 (VOC/RACT rule) to
include source categories previously excluded (e.g., waste water
treatment facilities);
Revised new source permitting requirements requiring more
stringent emissions control technology and/or emissions offsets;
NOX RACT requirements;
Regulations to establish plant-wide emissions caps
(potentially with emissions trading provisions);
Establish a Public Awareness/Ozone Action Day Program, a
two pronged program focusing on increasing the public's understanding
of air quality issues in the region and increasing support for actions
to improve the air quality, resulting in reduced emissions on days when
the ozone levels are likely to be high.
Initiate one or more of the following voluntary local
control measures:
(1) Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures--A series of measures designed
to promote bicycling and walking including both promotional activities
and enhancing the environment for these activities;
(2) Reduce Engine Idling--Voluntary programs to restrict heavy duty
diesel engine idling times for both trucks and school buses;
(3) Voluntary Partnership with Ground Freight Industry--A voluntary
program using incentives to encourage the ground freight industry to
reduce emissions;
(4) Increase Compliance with Open Burning Restrictions--Increase
public awareness of the existing open burning restrictions and work
with communities to increase compliance; and
(5) School Bus Engine Retrofit Program--Have existing school bus
engines retrofitted to lower emissions.
The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance
applies to the contingency measures concerning the option of
implementing regulatory requirements.
Confirmation of the monitored violation within 45 days of
occurrence;
Measure to be selected within 3 months after verification
of a monitored oz
